Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960

Street Dog Matters related : Interim Order passed by Honourable Supreme Court of India on 18th November 2015
by

Street Dog Matters related : Interim Order passed by Honourable Supreme Court of India on 18th November 2015

The Interim order of the Supreme Court of India passed on the 18th Nov 2015 while hearing ‘all street dog related matters’ emphatically directs that the laws made viz. Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and the Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules, 2001 have to be implemented and that there shall not be any indiscriminate killing of dogs. The Supreme Court Order observed that “There can be no trace of doubt that there has to be compassion for dogs and that they should not be killed in an indiscriminate manner…”

The key points in this Interim Order issued by the Honourable Supreme Court of India on 18th November 2015 are as follows:

The Order states- “There can be no trace of doubt that there has to be compassion for dogs and they should not be killed in an indiscriminate manner, but indubitably the lives of the human beings are to be saved and one should not suffer due to dog bite because of administrative lapse.”

It further reiterates that, “Rule 6 of the Animal Birth Control Rules 2001 enacted under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960, provides for obligations of the local authority. Rule 7 deals with capturing/sterilisation/ immunisation/release. Rule 8 deals with identification and recording and Rule 9 provides for euthanasia of street dogs. Rule 10 deals with furious or dumb rabid dogs.” and goes on to add that, ” As we find, the local authorities have a sacrosanct duty to provide sufficient number of dog pounds, including animal kennels/shelters, which may be managed by the animal welfare organizations, that apart, it is also incumbent upon the local authorities to provide requisite number of dog vans with ramps for the capture and transportation of street dogs; one driver and two trained dog catchers for each dog van; an ambulance-cum-clinical van as mobile centre for sterlisation and immunisation; incinerators for disposal of carcasses and periodic repair of shelter or pound. Rule 7 has its own significance. The procedure has to be followed before any steps are taken. Rules 9 and 10 take care of the dogs which are desirable to be euthanised.”

To explain to our readers Rule 9 – it means that only mortally wounded or terminally ill dogs i.e.when and only when a dog is unfit for survival/has no chance of recovery/healing which is medically proven by a Government certified Veterinary Doctor and it’s survival causes more pain for it is when u can think of euthanising.

….and then the order hammers home the point, that for now that the Animal Birth Control Rules, 2001, (for short, ‘the 2001 Rules’) shall prevail over the provisions contained in any local Act/Municipality Act by stating that, “for the present it is suffice to say that all the State municipal corporations, municipal committees, district boards and local bodies shall be guided by the Act and the Rules and it is the duty and obligation of the Animal Welfare Board to see that they are followed with all seriousness. It is also the duty of all the municipal corporations to provide infrastructure as mandated in the statute and the rules. Once that is done, we are disposed to think for the present that a balance between compassion to dogs and the lives of human being, which is appositely called a glorious gift of nature, may harmoniously co-exist.”.

And towards the end of this Interim Order passed by the Honourable Supreme Court of India, instructions are laid out for the Local bodies to follow, “The local authorities shall file affidavits including what kind of infrastructures they have provided, as required under the law. Needless to emphasize, no innovative method or subterfuge should be adopted not to carry out the responsibility under the 1960 Act or the 2001 Rules. Any kind of laxity while carrying out statutory obligations, is not countenanced in law.”

“A copy of the order passed today be sent to the Chief Secretary of each of the States and the competent authority of Union Territories, so that they can follow the same in letter and spirit. We would also request all the High Courts not to pass any order relating to the 1960 Act and the 2001 Rules pertaining to dogs. Needless to say, all concerned as mentioned herein-above, shall carry out this order and file their respective affidavits as directed“…are the concluding lines of this order as the matter gets listed for Final Hearing and Disposal on 9th March 2016.

The Hindu on SC Order 19112015

The Press Release issued by the Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI), a statutory body under the Ministry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change, Government of India on the above stated order, is shared below.

by

Noida Federation instructions to Resident Welfare Associations regarding lawful manner of dealing with street dogs

After the Municipal Corporation of Gurgaon’s directive to Presidents of all Gurgaon-based Residential Welfare Associations (RWAs) to stop harassing people/residents who have pets and tend to street dogs, comes the below mentioned letter issued by Federation of Noida Resident Welfare Associations to all its member RWAs in Noida, apprising them on the lawful manner of dealing with street dogs and the people who tend to them, feed them, get them sterilized and vaccinated.

So, for all those of you who stay in Noida and are being harassed by your respective RWA for feeding and tending to street dogs, please take note of this important letter, download it from the link below and use it to fight your case for the animals you care for.

Download by clicking here – Noida Federation instructions to RWAs regarding lawful manner of dealing with street dogs

Noida Federation instructions to RWAs regarding street dogs_Page 1 of the letter

Noida Federation instructions to RWAs regarding street dogs_Page 1 of the letter

Noida Federation instructions to RWAs regarding street dogs_Page 2 of the Letter

Noida Federation instructions to RWAs regarding street dogs_Page 2 of the Letter

Please also read:

Gurgaon Municipal Corporation’s Directive to Presidents of Residential Welfare Societies to stop harassing people who have pets and tend to street dogs

by

To all those of you who are being harassed by their neighbourhood for tending to animals….

Please remember that for the animals, if not for yourself, you need to be strong and fight this out.

While you can approach local animal welfare organisations or animal activists, but in the end, it is a fight you will have to fight on your own, for yourself and the animals you care for…

  • If talking to people and explaining them the below mentioned laws and constitutional provisions doesn’t help, then, whether you like it or you don’t, you need to approach the Police and file an F.I.R or Police Complaint against all the people who are harassing you, abusing you, threatening to kill/harm you/your property and the dogs/other animals you care for.
  • Be sure to mention full names and addresses of all the people who are harassing you and give complete true account of the matter, without exaggerating facts – take help of the points stated below to put your grievances and facts across and mention why you are seeking help from the Police and reporting this matter.
  • There is no law that prohibits feeding of street animals, and citizens who choose to do so are in fact performing a duty cast upon them by the Constitution of India. Persons, who are trying to interfere with their effort, or display aggression, can be held liable for having committed the offense described in the Indian Penal Code and criminal intimidation.
  • Moreover, as per Indian law, street dogs cannot be beaten or driven away. They can merely be sterilized in the manner envisaged in the Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules, 2001(Rules under Indian Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (PCA), 1960), vaccinated, and then returned back to their original locations.
  • If your municipality is not doing the same, you can file a Police Complaint or FIR against the local Municipal Corporation for flouting the laws and rules mentioned above, which need to be complied with throughout the country, as PCA Act is a Central Act, i.e. it is applicable across the country and the local Police has been mandated with the responsibility of enforcing this act and reporting/booking violations/offenders.

Constitutional provisions:

  • Article 51A of the Constitutional Law of India, speaks about the duties of every citizen of India. One of these duties includes having compassion for living creatures (Article 51 A (g) of the Indian Constitution). Those who look after animals and other creatures of God are thus protected under the Constitution.

 

  • Article 19 of the Constitution of India, deals with right to freedom and in this freedom are included the right to profession, occupation, trade and business. Therefore, it means that every citizen has the right to occupation and if someone has taken the caring of animals as his occupation, it is legal and he has every right to carry on with his occupation.

Legal provisions:

In a Judgment passed by the Delhi Court, it has been stated that the Animal Welfare Board of India and the Municipal Authorities have in the guidelines issued by them specified the problem often faced by individuals and families who adopt and feed stray animals. The court says that it is necessary to bring into record that these individuals and families who adopt stray animals are doing a great service to humanity as they are acting in the aid and assistance of Municipal Authorities by providing these animals with food and shelter and also by getting them vaccinated and sterilized. Without assistance of such persons no local Municipal Authority can successfully carry out its ABC programme. The Court has proceeded to say that the local police and the municipal authorities are under obligation not only to encourage such adoption but also to ensure protection to such persons who come forward to take care of these animals specifically the community or neighbourhood dogs so that they are not subjected to any kind of cruelty, finally, the Court has said that every individual has the right to live his life in the manner he wants and it is necessary that the society and the community recognize it.

  • If you are a woman/girl who is being abused/harassed/threatened by neighbours/people around for being kind to animals, please also note that you can lodge F.I.Rs against these people Under Section 509 of Indian Penal Code (U/S 509 of IPC) – which is a cognizable offence.
  • Under the Govt. of India, Animal Birth Control Rules 2001 (drafted under the Indian Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960), no sterilized dogs can be relocated from their area. As per five different High Court orders, sterilized dogs have to remain in their original areas. If the dog is not sterilized, the Society can simply ask an animal welfare organization to sterilize and vaccinate the dog. They cannot relocate them. Relocation is not permissible, as it would cause more problems such as an increase in dog bites as new dogs will move into the area who are unfamiliar with residents and therefore more likely to be hostile. All problems of stray animals have to be handled within the institutional framework available. No association, recognized or unrecognized, shall take recourse to any action regarding stray animals on their own, either themselves or through any person employed by them like security guards. While residents and Associations are free to address institutional agencies for redressal of grievances in this matter, no resident/association will interfere with the freedom of other residents in caring and attending animals.
  • Section 11 of The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 forbids the displacement of Animals from its natural environment into an environment that is hostile to it, where the animal may be injured/hurt/maimed or killed due to lack of food or fights with other animals. Also, please remember that Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960 is a Central Act, i.e. it is applicable throughout the country and the powers to enforce this law have been given to the Local Police.
  • Additionally, Section 429 of the Indian Penal Code also provides for imprisonment and fine, in cases involving animal cruelty. Section 429 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860, a Central Government Act, reads as follows:

“Mischief by killing or maiming cattle, etc., of any value or any animal of the value of fifty rupees.– Whoever commits mischief by killing, poisoning, maiming or rendering useless, any elephant, camel, horse, mule, buffalo, bull, cow or ox, whatever may be the value thereof, of any other animal of the value of fifty rupees or upwards, shall be punished with imprisonment or either description for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine, or with both.”

Following are some of the self-explanatory documents that one can look up and refer to:

1. A 2 page circular issued by the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances, and Training, on the aspect of street animal feeding and prohibits central government employees from harassing street dogs or those feeding/looking after them.

https://jaagrutiindia.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/public-grievances-circular-pg-1.jpg

https://jaagrutiindia.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/public-grievances-circular-pg-2.jpg

2. The Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules, 2001.

https://jaagrutiindia.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/the-animal-birth-control-dogs-rules-2001.pdf

3. A directive issued by the Animal Welfare Board of India, constituted by the Ministry of Environment and Forests- provides immunity to animal feeders and restricts RWAs from harassing people tending to dogs.

https://jaagrutiindia.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/awbi-direction.pdf

4. M.C.D. (Municipal Corporation of Delhi) notification, showing the approach of the M.C.D. with regard to street animals, which is based on the law of the land.

https://jaagrutiindia.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/mcd-notices-toi-march-2009.jpg

5. A Times of India news report regarding a Delhi High Court direction to the police to protect persons who feed stray dogs.

https://jaagrutiindia.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/times-of-india-article-on-feeding.pdf

6. A Hindustan Times news report regarding the view taken by the Supreme Court regarding stray dogs.

https://jaagrutiindia.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/ht-article-24th-jan-supreme-court-stays-bombay-high-court-order.jpg

7. An order passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi https://jaagrutiindia.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/addln-chief-metropolitan-magistrates-order-on-street-dogs-of-india.pdf

8. A Dossier of Indian Street Dog related laws and court rulings – https://jaagrutiindia.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/a-dossier-of-indian-street-dog-related-laws-and-court-rulings.pdf and Copies of other court judgments can be downloaded from http://www.strays.in/index.php/legal-precedence-faqs-judgements-court-cases-drafts/

9. Reporting a crime and lodging an F.I.R or Police Complaint-

https://jaagruti.org/2013/12/13/reporting-a-crime-all-about-lodging-an-f-i-r-with-the-police/

If you want awareness workshops held in your company or Institution on the subject of animal laws and welfare, for audience in any age-group, please write to us on contact@jaagruti.org

by

The law on pet owners in apartments

The Hindu published the following article on the laws pet owners have to keep animals in their houses

With apartment complexes becoming the norm, it becomes important for pet owners to understand their rights and responsibilities, for the welfare of their pets and their neighbours. Residents sometimes find a letter taped to the notice board (on behalf of the Apartment Association) that says that pets are banned and that owners must either vacate or abandon their pets.

“This is tantamount to harassment, and utterly unlawful,”says Anjali Sharma, Advocate, practising at the Delhi High Court and Supreme Court of India, who is an Executive Committee Member of, and Legal Advisor to the Animal Welfare Board of India. “Apartment owners’ associations and residents’ welfare associations cannot ‘legislate’. They cannot take it upon themselves to issue ‘edicts’ and restrict rights available to citizens. There is no law enacted by Parliament or any State Legislature that ‘bans’ companion animals. At best, municipalities and local authorities can regulate, or insist on registration or licensing of pets. These high handed circulars and letters suddenly taped to notice boards are therefore illegal. By pressurizing people to abandon their pets in this manner, they actually compel them to violate the law, since Section 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, declares the same as being an offence.”

She notes that consumer courts at Mumbai have at least on two occasions upheld the rights of residents faced with similar harassment, and observed that in the present times, pets are akin to children. Denying pet-owners the right to use elevators or common areas with their pets has been held to be deficiency in service on the part of these associations. She therefore urges pet-owners to stand by their companion animals in the face of such harassment, and refuse to ‘give them up’, or abandon them.

These rights, however, do come with duties. Pet-owners must earn the goodwill of neighbours by keeping their dogs on leash while in common areas and cleaning up after them if they soil the place. Sharma tells pet owners that being considerate is a must, and a basic courtesy. “Be reasonable”, is her simple, yet powerful advice to pet owners. “Exercise care. Ensure that their vaccinations are always up to date. And always walk your dog with a leash”. She signs off with the advice that being a responsible pet parent is important to ensure harmony in community living.

by

Gurgaon Municipal Corporation’s Directive to Presidents of Residential Welfare Societies to stop harassing people who have pets and tend to street dogs

Below are embedded image files/scans of a 3 page letter issued by Commissioner of Municipal Corporation of Gurgaon to Presidents of all RWAs in Gurgaon to stop harassing people who tend to street dogs and those who have pets (by passing unlawful dictats of banning pet dogs). Please use it to contest against your respective RWA’s who come out with weird aristocratic bye-laws on the same.

You can download all these pages combined together as  PDF File by clicking on the link below.

Gurgaon-Municipal-Corporation-Directive-regarding-pet-dogs-and-stray-dogs_2012 (https://jaagrutiindia.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/gurgaon-municipal-corporation-directive-regarding-pet-dogs-and-stray-dogs_2012.pdf)

Gurgaon-Municipal-Corporation-Directive-regarding-pet-dogs-and-stray-dogs_2012_Page 1

Gurgaon-Municipal-Corporation-Directive-regarding-pet-dogs-and-street-dogs_2012_Page 1

Gurgaon-Municipal-Corporation-Directive-regarding-pet-dogs-and-stray-dogs_2012_Page 2

Gurgaon-Municipal-Corporation-Directive-regarding-pet-dogs-and-street-dogs_2012_Page 2

Gurgaon-Municipal-Corporation-Directive-regarding-pet-dogs-and-stray-dogs_2012_Page 3

Gurgaon-Municipal-Corporation-Directive-regarding-pet-dogs-and-street-dogs_2012_Page 3

Suggested reading:

For all yours reference again, please click the link below to the Notice issued by a battery of lawyers to a Gurgaon based RWA that came out with an absurd ruling to ban people from having pets.

Legal notice issued to Kanchanjunga Coop.Group Housing Society at Gurgaon 

Also, please refer to this page on the website of Pet Parents Association.

by

Pet Dogs and Street Dogs: Do’s and Dont’s

Below is an article written by Mrs. Maneka Gandhi, who is the Chairperson of an organisation called, ‘People for Animals’. We happened to receive a copy of it in our Inbox from a fellow animal rescuer and deem it wise to share it on this blog of ours, since a lot of our helpline calls and e-mails are related to this subject.

———————————————————————————————

In recent times, RWAs, Apartment Owners’ Associations, and Cooperative Group Housing Societies, having taking to imposing various restrictions on pet owning residents, such as disallowing the use of lifts, or parks, by pets, or even banning pets altogether. There is widespread resentment against these moves, because not only do they unreasonably restrict the rights of residents, they are also unlawful and against recent court rulings.

Moreover, as an RWA, or an Apartment Owners’ Association, Cooperative Group Housing Society, gated complex, etc., you may often be getting complaints regarding street dogs, and requests that they be driven away, through beatings by security guards or otherwise, or just dumped elsewhere. If you accede to these requests, you will not only be violating laws and pronouncements of courts, but will not achieve any permanent solutions either. The problem will remain a perennial problem ; and you will also run afoul of animal welfare people that are increasing in number by the day, and banding themselves into well organized groups.

Below, are some DOs and DON’Ts, with respect to both, PET DOGS & STREET DOGS.

I.          WITH RESPECT TO PET DOGS & PET OWNING RESIDENTS :Please keep in mind that the following is what you CANNOT do :-

 BANNING pets, whether allowed :

a)     Even by obtaining consensus, or even if the majority of the residents want it, you cannot legally introduce any sort of ‘ban’ on the keeping of pet dogs by residents.

b)     Even by amending bye-laws or regulations or otherwise, such a ‘ban’ cannot be put into place since it is illegal, and does not have the sanction of law. In fact, in trying to ‘ban’ pets, or limit their number, you interfere with a fundamental freedom guaranteed to the citizens of India, i.e. the freedom to choose the life they wish to live, which includes facets such as living with or without companion animals.

c)    If the residents that have pets are not violating any municipal or other laws, you cannot object. The general body cannot frame or amend bye-laws that are at variance with the laws of the country. Even by a complete majority, a general body cannot adopt an illegality. Please remember, you do not have the right to legislate, and ‘lay down law’ for residents, and apartment owners or even tenants.

Use of LIFTS by pets :

d)    There is a court ruling to the effect that pets cannot be disallowed from the use of lifts ; and no charges can be imposed either, by housing societies for the use of lifts by pets. In fact, it was widely reported in the news that the concerned court had ruled that “Dogs are family, can use lifts for free”. Kindly ensure that this sort of restriction is not therefore imposed – neither a ban, nor any special charges for the use of lifts by pets.

 Use of PARKS by pets :

e)    Banning pets from gardens or parks, is short-sighted. Firstly, you may or may not own the garden or park in question. It may be an MCD or DDA park, or belong to any other organization. Secondly, pets that are not properly exercised may show aggression in frustration ; and that, surely, cannot contribute to the benefit of the residents. It may be better to fix timings when pets can be walked without inconvenience to other residents. These timings can then be intimated to the general body.

Use of leashes/muzzles by pet owners, defecation by pets in community premises, imposition of fines and other similar measures :

f)     You can request pet owners to keep their pets on leash, when walking them in common areas. You cannot however ask for muzzles as muzzles are illegal for sustained use as dogs die through overheating. Please remember, the law already provides for penalties for negligent pet owners, which the aggrieved parties can avail of.

g)    In the absence of central or state laws requiring cleaning of pet poop by pet owners, you cannot impose any rule, regulation or bye-law, with respect to mandatory cleaning of pet poop, or impose special charges or fines on pet owners. You can, of course, request them to do so.

h)    You can also experiment with the creation of various pet defecation areas within community premises, which is what some housing societies and sectors are doing. These can be imaginatively spaced out within the precincts, and you can request pet owners to train their pets into using the same. You cannot however impose fines and special charges of any kind on pet owners, because there is no mandate in law for the same.

Intimidation :

i)     Lastly, please also always bear in mind that if any association succeeds in intimidating a pet owner into ‘giving up’ or ‘abandoning’ a pet, it will actually have contributed to a violation of law ; and may well be aggravating the menace of ownerless animals on the street, that are not accustomed to living on the street and therefore get involved in and lead to accidents, injuries and deaths. Please also bear in mind that intimidation is an offense in law.

II.         WITH RESPECT TO STREET DOGS :What you CANNOT do :-

1)         Beating and driving away street dogs, NOT ALLOWED ; animal birth control and release back into same locality/territory, ALLOWED :

As per Indian law street dogs (i.e. stray dogs) cannot be beaten or driven away or dumped elsewhere or killed. They can merely be sterilized in the manner envisaged in the Animal Birth Control (Dogs) Rules, 2001, vaccinated, and then returned back to their original locations. For the area-wise sterilization program that the law mandates shall be followed, dogs have to be returned back to their original habitat after sterilization and immunization.

2)         The rationale behind release into the same locality/territory :

Dogs, being territorial in nature, tend to fight off other dogs, and keep them from entering their territories ; and in this manner, the dog population in each territory / within each locale, stabilizes.If, however, they are removed permanently, other dogs come into the ‘dog-free’ vacuum that is thereby created. So the ‘problem’ continues.

3)         Street dog feeding, whether inside or outside community premises :

 There is no law that prohibits the feeding of street animals.Citizens who choose to do so are in fact performing a duty cast upon them by the Constitution of India – of showing compassion to all living creatures. As recently as the 12th of December, 2011, stray dog feeding has been upheld yet again by the High Court, and the emphatic challenge to the same by one R.W.A., disregarded.

4)         Animal cruelty :

Please also note, animal cruelty is an offence – under Section 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, and Section 428 of the Indian Penal Code –punishable with imprisonment and fine.

5)         Intimidation :

Attempts to interfere with, or harass persons who choose to tend to and feed community dogs, maybe tantamount to the very grave offence of criminal intimidation.

6)         Aggression to dogs, counter productive :

Last but not the least : any aggression or hostility that the dogs may be subjected to, will only render them aggressive, and hostile to humans. They may then resort to snapping and biting in self -defense. If the same happens, the human aggressors shall be the only ones to blame.

by

Pets and Resident Welfare Associations (RWA): How does the law treat your pet?

Everyday, we receive many queries and calls over the Jaagruti helpline complaining about how their Residential Society’s Welfare Associations (commonly abbreviated as RWA’s) putting up notices ‘banning pets’, coming out with ‘no pets allowed’ clauses in their society bye-laws, ‘asking people to abandon their pets’, ‘mistreating street dogs’ etc. The article below by Rishi Dev of Citizens for Animal Rights, is a must-read for all those facing such a situation. This article explains as well as empowers you with information to fight your own respective battles in this regard for your sake and for your pet child..who has no one other than you in this world to fight for him/her or their rights.

Guest Post* by Rishi Dev, Citizens for Animal Rights

In 2010, the Central Mumbai Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum gave a strong directive to a group housing society who was charging a pet owner resident monthly fees for using lifts. The court clearly said – “Dogs are part of a family hence they have the right to use the lift just as any other member, and we cannot decide who is a family member and who isn’t, each family decides for itself.”

Before this in 2008 a similar order came from a lower court that clarified that pets are part of family and cannot be restricted from living or using the residential complexes.

In 2012, the Gurgaon Municipal Corporation was the first of their kind to issue strict notices to all CGHS and RWAs in Gurgaon, warning them not to formulate rules and regulations against pets and that any such move is in conflict with the law. The notices clearly stated – “Such a move may lead to dissolution of the RWA and prosecution of its office bearers, says the letter. It is illegal to remove animals from the area through security guards employed by RWAs. Nor can they intimidate residents who may be feeding those animals. Under stray dog management rules 2001, it’s illegal for an individual, RWA or estate management to remove or relocate dogs. The dogs have to be sterilized and vaccinated and returned to the same area. Vaccinated and sterilized dogs cannot be removed by the municipality too. Under Section 506 of the IPC, it’s a crime to threaten abuse or harass neighbors who feed animals.”

So what is origin of these laws protecting dogs and cats from humans who treat them unequal?

The system of law in Indian is a tiered system, based on Arthashastra from 400 B.C. & Manusmriti from 100 A.D. wherein the central philosophy was tolerance & pluralism. This is the reason the constitution declares India to be a sovereign socialist secular democratic republic, assuring its citizens justice, equality, and liberty.

The hierarchical system of Indian constitution thus forbids the lower hierarchies to overrule or override the higher orders, laws, directions or acts. This means that if Supreme Court says ‘yes’ to something, the ‘no’ by the high courts’ gets automatically nullified. This hierarchy comes down to the lowest local urban body or court. In India most courts have already ruled in favor of the animals in all respects. Hence any organization, individual or body ruling or following actions against such orders are automatically breaking the law and in contempt of the constitution and the honorable courts.

There are laws and constitutional provisions directly allowing people to take care of animals, whether inside or outside their places of work or living. The laws clearly protect people and their animals from all kinds of discrimination.  The Indian constitution states them very clearly via various sections. Article 48-A – “The State shall endeavor to protect & improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country.” Article 51-A deals with the fundamental duties of the citizen.  Article 51-A(g) states – ” It shall be duty of every citizen of India to protect & improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife and to have compassion for living creatures.” Article 19 deals with the fundamental rights of the citizen. So “Right to Protect the Environment ” comes within Article 19. After the Stockholm Declaration in 1972 the Indian Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976 inserted for the first time specific provisions to protect & improve the environment. I.P.C. Section 428 and 429 provides severe punishment to people resorting to dislocation, abduction and acts of cruelty towards community animals or pets. Ministry of Public Grievances notification and a similar notification by Animal Welfare Board of India dated March 2008, provide immunity to animal feeders and restrict government employees or bodies such as Resident Welfare Associations from harassing people who try to feed or help animals. Article 25, 26, 27, 28 provides religious freedom to all citizens and preserves the principle of secularism in India. According to the constitution, all religions are equal before the State. Citizens are free to preach, practice and propagate any religion of their choice in their own way. Keeping or feeding animals is a part of the same right. The other acts which protect animals are The  Environment (Protection)  Act – 1986 & Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972.

Hence, anyone taking care, keeping pets or street animals has natural immunity in the law. There are many orders pertaining to street animals by many courts. But in the recent times many RWAs have shown their autocracy over residents keeping pets. Keeping the same in mind the Animal Welfare Board of India and many municipal corporations have time and again written to the Registrar of Societies (ROS) and their RWAs to refrain from these undemocratic actions.

An RWA is a private, representative body which has no legal sanctity. It is just a group of people who have come together and formed a club. Their resolutions and bye laws are not legal mandates and especially if they violate the fundamental rights of a citizen or even more goes against an existing court order. Such RWAs can be legally prosecuted and if need be can face fines or imprisonment or both. Such precedence has been set before. If any resident faces such harassment from RWAs, must immediately approach the local magistrate and file a complaint of harassment and violation of their fundamental rights. The complaint must also be sent to ROS asking them to dissolve the RWA with immediate effect. AWBI must also be approached for taking appropriate legal action against such RWA members.

by

Do-it-Yourself (DIY) Series-4: A Dossier of Indian Street Dog related laws and court rulings- Read, Print and Share widely

To all those who feed and take care of their neighbourhood street dogs in India, we have one request. Don’t feel weak. The laws are on your side and also in favour of the street dogs you care for.

In this post, we are sharing with you one comprehensive document that compiles all the laws, news-clippings and court orders/rulings, pertaining to street dogs

Please download this document by clicking here: A Dossier of Indian Street Dog related laws and court rulings

Save it, take print-outs and read it well.

These are updated laws, rules, orders pertaining to DOGS, their feeding and other rights. Most dog lovers don’t bother to read them and end up getting harassed while the law is strong and clear. Please keep a copy ready and if possible submit one copy in your local police station and the RWA, so unfortunate encounters can be averted beforehand. 

A point wise synopsis is also written in the beginning of this document.

We thank Citizens for Animal Rights for their effort in compiling this document and sharing the same with us. By posting it here, we are sharing it further and hope you all will share it widely too and feel empowered.

Remember: Your responsibility however doesn’t end with just feeding them, please also ensure that these dogs you care for are sterilized and vaccinated…since you are friendly with them, can touch them, it is much easier for you to collaborate with the NGO run Animal Hospital (that runs the local Municipality supported ‘Animal Birth Control’ Programme for street dogs) near your home to help undertake the sterilization of these dogs, it is just a one time exercise and will prevent you the agony of seeing pups dying (of illnesses and car accidents) in front of your eyes ever so frequently.

by

Do-it-Yourself (DIY) Series-3: Apply for the ‘Colony Caretaker of Animals-Card’ from Animal Welfare Board of India

AWBI website screenshot-information to dogfeeders, colony caretakers

AWBI website screenshot-information to dogfeeders, colony caretakers

Animal Welfare Board of India has decided to issue Identity Cards to Street Dog Feeders/Colony Care Takers of Animals who are taking care of animals in their locality.

A proforma of registration form can be downloaded from this link- http://awbi.org/awbi-pdf/caretakers.pdf or please click below.

AWBI Form for getting Colony Caretaker of Animals ID Card

Please download the form and send the duly filled in form along with the following:

– Two passport size photographs.
– Self -attested true copy of the Ration Card/ Voter ID/ Driving License/ Passport/ PAN Card

 to

ANIMAL WELFARE BOARD OF INDIA
(Ministry of Environment and Forests, Govt. of India)
Post Box No. 8672, 13/1, Third Seaward Road, Valmiki Nagar,Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai – 600 041

Colony Animal Cretaker Form_AWBI_English

Colony Animal Cretaker Form_AWBI_Hindi

A news report on the same in Indian Express dated 21st January 2013, by Senior Correspondent Kamala Kelkar,  is posted below. Please hoever note that the process may take less or more than a couple of weeks for you to receive your cards, as mentioned below

People who care for street dogs will soon be getting government-issued identity cards. The new ID cards are expected to do away with harassment faced by many such persons from the general public, when they try to feed canines on the road.

In a move that animal activists termed “unprecedented,” the Animal Welfare Board of India (AWBI) has decided last week that anyone who voluntarily cares for strays — dog feeders and colony caretakers who tend to animals in their locality.

It Board has put up a one-page registration form (can be downloaded free of cost) on its website awbi.org, for those who want to get these ID cards.

The applicant needs to fill in personal information such as name, address and experience. Once the application is submitted, the ID card would be processed and mailed to the applicant, board member and legal advisor Anjali Sharma said.

“The card would have the person’s name and an attestation that he/she is doing a right and lawful deed and the Animal Welfare Board supports it. This lends credibility to the person,” Sharma said.

The AWBI is a legal advisory body that was formed under the Animal Prevention Act of 1960 to protect the animals.

Sharma explained that the goal of the card, which does not provide any exclusive rights, was solely the welfare of animals and caretakers.

“Most people don’t realize that sterilization and vaccination of stray dogs would be possible only through feeding and befriending dogs,” Sharma said.

In December 2011, the Delhi High Court had passed an order voicing its approval for designated “dog feeding spots” for stray canines in the city. It passed the order on a petition which sought to protect dogs from “intimidating” residents, so they could be fed without any hassle.

The court also ruled that police should assist dog feeders if they faced any “harassment” from residents and also ordered the AWBI to designate specific feeding areas.

Rishi Dev, founder of Citizens for Animal Rights who has written a book on “Urban disputes over animals”, said this was the first time that the government was supporting such an initiative.

Sharma hoped that many would come forward to apply for the cards. “They are performing a duty,” she said. “And it’s a legitimate exercise.”

by

Indian Government bans use of live animals for education, research

As reported by Times of India’s Linah Baliga in a news report dated 17th April, 2012

MUMBAI: The Union ministry of environment and forests (MoEF) has banned the use of live animals in dissection and other experiments in educational and research institutions. But scientists conducting new molecular research will be exempted from the ban.

Based on the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (1960), the MoEF has issued guidelines to the University Grants Commission, ministry of health and family welfare, Pharmacy Council of India and the Medical Council of India to discontinue dissection and experiments with live animals in universities, colleges, research institutes, hospitals, laboratories and instead use alternatives like computer simulation.

The MoEF says that the central government is duty-bound to use alternatives to avoid unnecessary suffering or pain to animals.

It states that effective alternatives in the form of CDs, computer simulations and mannequin models are available; they are not only effective as absolute replacements for animals in teaching anatomy or physiology but are also superior learning tools in teaching of pharmacy or life sciences.

The guidelines were framed based on the duties of the Committee for the Purpose of Control and Supervision of Experiments and Animals (CPCSEA), which has been constituted under the provisions of Section 15 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (1960).

The committee comprises seven nominees – three nominees appointed by CPCSEA and the rem-aining four from educa-tional institutes.

“The animal experiments should be stopped in all institutes except for the purpose of new molecular research. Sometimes, in laboratories, a lot of work is repeated and animals become unnecessary victims. Only scientists researching on a new molecular theory can experiment on animals. In medical and pharmacy colleges, there is unwanted cruelty towards animals which can be avoided. These guidelines mention imprisonment for five years and monetary penalty,” said Mangal Jain, a nominee of the Institutional Animal Ethics Committee (IAEC), which is appointed by CPCSEA.

Hoshang Bilimoria, also a nominee appointed by the CPCSEA, said the guidelines were a welcome change.

“CPCSEA should give the nominees the power to inspect animals housed in educational institutes, experimentation centres or technical laboratories without prior intimation to the institutes. Cross-checks should also be maintained through other members,” said Bilimoria.

Additional Links for Reference:

1.  UGC Guidelines for discontinuation of dissection and animal experimentation in Zoology/ Life Sciences in a phased manner

2. Circular issued by Pharmacy Council of India to its Member Institutions_19 January 2012

by

यह गली के कुत्ते ….

By आशीष पांडे

Courtesy: Navbharat Times Monday March 14, 2011

एक शख्स ने पेपर में छपने के लिए शिकायत भेजी कि हमारे मोहल्ले में कई आवारा कुत्ते हैं। जब देखो भौंकते हुए पीछे पड़ जाते हैं, सड़क पर आराम से चलने भी नहीं देते। मौका मिले तो काट भी लेते हैं। उन्होंने इस बात पर अफसोस भी जताया कि हमारे कानून ऐसे हैं कि आवारा कुत्तों को मारा नहीं जा सकता।

एमसीडी (दिल्ली नगर निगम) वाले मरे मन से उन्हें पकड़ते हैं लेकिन जल्द ही छोड़ना पड़ता है। बाहर निकलकर वह अपनी तादाद फिर बढ़ा लेते हैं। इनकी समस्या इतनी बेकाबू हो गई है कि इंसानों का घर से बाहर निकलना भी मुश्किल हो गया है।

बहुत ही जेनुइन प्रॉब्लम है। कुछ वैसी ही जैसी हमारे दफ्तर में काम करने वाली, हमारे मोहल्लों में रहने वाली और हमारे कॉलेजों में पढ़ने वाली लड़कियां, औरतें और बुजुर्ग महिलाएं रोज झेलती हैं।

फर्क बस इतना है कि आवारा कुत्तों की जगह हमारे समाज के मर्द ले लेते हैं। जो जब देखो फब्तियां कसते हुए पीछे पड़ जाते हैं, सड़क पर तसल्ली से चलने भी नहीं देते। मौका मिले तो रेप करने या मर्डर करने तक से नहीं चूकते। अफसोस ऐसे लोगों के खिलाफ हमारे पास मौत की सजा का कानून नहीं है।

जो मजबूरी कुत्तों को पकड़ने में एमसीडी की है, कुछ वैसी ही मजबूरी दिल्ली पुलिस की भी है। मरे मन से पकड़ तो लेते हैं लेकिन जल्द छोड़ना पड़ता है। समस्या इतनी बेकाबू हो गई है कि लड़कियों और औरतों का इस दिल्ली में घर से निकलना मुश्किल हो रहा है।

बहरहाल, कुत्तों से परेशान मर्दों का सुझाव है कि इसका एक ही इलाज है, सभी आवारा कुत्तों को मार दिया जाए। न रहेंगे कुत्ते न रहेगी समस्या। भले ही एकाध कुत्ते ही इतने खतरनाक हों जो काटने को आते हों, लेकिन वे मानते हैं कि सभी को मार देने से यह समस्या खत्म हो जाएगी।

उनकी इस सोच के आधार पर मर्दों से परेशान औरतें क्या सोचती हैं, वह बताने की जरूरत है क्या….

by

Animal Abuse-from F.I.R to Jail

We at Jaagruti had attended the ‘India for Animals’ 2011 conference held at Chennai from 29-31 January 2011, with the objective of sharing our learnings from the conference with the readers of this website as well as the many people who keep searching the internet for information on such topics and often end up being disappointed with the paucity of easily understandable information available online on subjects of animal welfare and laws for the common man who cares for animals on the street and empathizes with the suffering of animals. The information presented below will be useful for reporting cases and lodging F.I.Rs with police on issues other than animal abuse as well.

Mr. Ajay Marathe, an RTI Activist from Mumbai shares this important brochure titled, “First Information Report (F.I.R) and YOU’ prepared by the Commonwealth Human Rights initiative which provides answers to all the questions related to F.I.R’s that may cross our mind often. You can download this brochure by clicking here.

Below is a handout shared by Ms. Anjali Sharma (Advocate, Legal advisor and board member, Animal Welfare Board of India) and Inspector Ajaib Singh of Punjab Police in the workshop they had held on Day 2 of this conference titled, “Animal Abuse-F.I.R se Jail tak‘

WHAT IS AN FIR, AND WHO CAN LODGE AN FIR?

First Information Repot (FIR) is a written document prepared by the police when they receive information about the commission of cognizable offence.  It is generally a complaint lodged with the police by the victim of a cognizable offence, or by someone on his/her behalf.  Any one who knows about the commission of a cognizable offence, including a police officer who comes to know about the same, can lodge an FIR.

WHAT IS A COGNIZABLE OFFENCE?

A cognizable offence is one for which the police are authorized to start investigation on their own, and do not require any order from the court to do so. They are authorized to arrest without warrant.

WHAT IS A NON-COGNIZABLE OFFENCE?

A non-cognizable offence is an offence in which a police officer has no authority to arrest without warrant.  The police cannot investigate such an offence without the court’s permission.

THE POLICE MAY NOT INVESTIGATE A COMPLAINT AND REGISTER FIR IF:-

(i)              The case, in the opinion of the officer in charge of a police station, is not of serious nature;

(ii)            The police feel that there is not enough ground to investigate.

However, the police must record reasons for not conducting an investigation, and in the latter case, must also inform the complainant.

HOW SHOULD YOU GO ABOUT LODGING AN FIR?

i)                Inform the officer in charge of the concerned police station, either orally, or in writing, regarding the commission of the offence ;

ii)              When information about the commission of a cognizable offence is given orally, the police must write it down ;

iii)            It is your right as the person giving information regarding the commission of an offence to demand that the information recorded by the police be read over to you.

iv)             You should sign the report only after verifying that the information recorded by the police is as per the details given by you.

v)               Always ask for a copy of the FIR, since it your right to get it free of cost.

WHAT SHOULD YOU MENTION IN YOUR COMPLAINT THAT YOU WANT REGISTERED AS AN FIR?

  • Your name and address;
  • Date, and time and the location at which the incident that you wish to report about, occurred;
  • An accurate description of the incident that you wish to report;
  • Names and descriptions of the persons involved in the incident.

WHAT CAN YOU DO IF YOUR FIR IS NOT REGISTERED?

  • You can meet the Superintendent of Police or other higher officers like Deputy Inspector General of Police or Inspector General of Police, and bring your complaint to their notice.
  • You can send your complaint in writing and by post to the Superintendent of Police concerned.  If the Superintendent of Police is satisfied with your complaint, he shall either investigate the case himself or order an investigation to be made.
  • You can file a private complaint before the court having jurisdiction.

——–             ——–             ——–             ——–

THE POLICE ACT, 1861

An Act for the Regulation of Police

Preamble: – WHEREAS it is expedient to re-organise the police and to make it a more efficient instrument for the prevention and detection of crime; It is enacted as follows: –

——–

34. Punishment for certain offences on roads, etc:- Powers of police officers.-

Any person who, on any road or in any 2[open place or] street or thoroughfare within the limits of any town to which this section shall be specially extended by the State-Government, commits any of the following offences, to the obstruction, inconvenience, annoyance, risk, danger of damage of the 3[ residents or passengers] shall, on conviction before a Magistrate, be liable to a fine not exceeding fifty rupees, or to imprisonment 4[with or without hard labour] not exceeding eight days; and it shall be lawful for any police officer to take into custody; without a warrant, any person who, within his view, commitsany of such offences namely :-

First-Slaughtering cattle, Curious riding, etc:- Any person who slaughters any cattle or cleans any carcass; any person who rides or drives any cattle recklessly or furiously, or trains or breaks any horse or other cattle;

Second-Cruelty to animal:- Any person who wantonly or cruelly beats, abuses or tortures any animal; .

——–             ——–             ——–             ——–             ——–             ——–

THE DELHI POLICE ACT, 1978

An Act to amend and consolidate the law relating to the regulation of the police in the Union territory of Delhi.

It is to be noted that the Delhi Police act has a special chapter, i.e Chapter 9 devoted to empowering officials of Delhi Police with special powers over and above those mentioned in the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960 to enforce this act further

——–

CHAPTER IX (DELHI POLICE ACT): Special Powers under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960

73. Powers with regard to offences under Act 59 or 1960. (1) When in respect of an animal an offence punishable under sub-section (1) of Sec. 11 or Sec. 12 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 has been committed, when there is a reasonable ground for suspecting that such offence has been committed, a police officer may-

(a) take the animal to the Metropolitan Magistrate, or

(b) if the accused person so requires, take the animal to a veterinary officer specified by general or special order by the Administrator in this behalf:

Provided that the police officer may, instead of taking the animal to a veterinary officer, take the animal for detention in a dispensary, or in any suitable place approved by the Administrator by general or special order and the animal shall thereupon be detained there until its production before a Metropolitan Magistrate, or

(c) take the animal to an infirmary appointed under Sec. 35 of the said Act for treatment and detention thereto, pending direction of a Magistrate under sub-section (2) of that section, or

(d) when the animal is in such physical condition that it cannot be taken to a veterinary officer or a Metropolitan Magistrate, draw up a report of the condition of the animal in the presence of two or more respectable persons describing such wound, sores, fractures, bruises, or other marks of injury as may be found on the body of the animal:

Provided that the police officer may take the animal for detention in a dispensary or any suitable place approved by the Administrator by general or special order and the animal shall thereupon be detained there until its produce before a Metropolitan Magistrate.

(2) Where an animal is detained in a dispensary, infirmary or other place under sub-section (1), the animal shall be produced before a Metropolitan magistrate with the least possible delay and in any case within a period not exceeding three days from the date on which it was so detained.

——–

77. Power of police officer to unsaddle animal or to unload it. When a police officer in good faith suspects that any animal being employed, in any work or labour is, by reason of any sore, unfit to be so employed, he may require the  person  in  charge  of  such  animal  to

unsaddle or unload it for the purpose of ascertaining whether any sore exists and. if any person refuses to do so, such police officer may himself unsaddle or unload the animal or may cause the same to be unsaddled or unloaded.

78. Arrest without warrant in case of certain offences under Act 59 of 1960. Any police officer may arrest, without a warrant from a Magistrate, any person committing in his presence any offence punishable under clauses (a) to (m) (both inclusive) of sub-section (1) of Sec. 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960.

MADRAS CITY POLICE ACT, 1888

An Act to regulate the Police of the City of Madras.

——–

Section 24 – Police Officers and Agent of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals may arrest without warrant in view of offence

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or any other Law for the time being in force :-

(a) any offence made punishable by Sections 45, 46, 49-A, 72 or 75 shall be cognizable.

(b) any Police Officer may arrest without a warrant any person committing in his view any offence made punishable by this Act.

(2) Any agent of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals who is specially empowered by the State Government in that behalf may arrest without a warrant any person committing in his view any offence punishable under Section 53.

(3) The agent shall have power to release any person so arrested on his executing a bond with or without sureties, for his appearance before a Magistrate if and when required.

——–

Section 53 – Penalty for cruelty to animals

Whoever cruelly beats, ill-treats or tortures any animal, or causes any animal to be cruelly beaten, ill-treated or tortured, shall be liable on conviction to fine not exceeding one hundred rupees or to imprisonment, not exceeding three months, or to both.

——–             ——–             ——–             ——–             ——–             ——–

 

THE INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860

——–

Mischief by killing or maiming animal of the value of ten rupees.

428. Mischief by killing or maiming animal of the value of ten rupees.-Whoever commits mischief by killing, poisoning, maiming or rendering useless any animals or animal of the value of the ten rupees or upwards, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

Classification of Offence:- The offence under this section is cognizable, bailable, compoundable and triable by any Magistrate.

Mischief by killing or maiming cattle, etc., of any value or any animal of the value of fifty rupees.

429. Mischief by killing or maiming cattle, etc., of any value or any animal of the value of fifty rupees.–Whoever commits mischief by killing, poisoning, maiming or rendering useless, any elephant, camel, horse, mule, buffalo, bull, cow or ox, whatever may be the value thereof, of any other animal of the value of fifty rupees or upwards, shall be punished with imprisonment or either description for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine, or with both.

Classification of Offence:- The offence under this section is cognizable, bailable, compoundable and triable by Magistrate of the first class.

——–

Negligent conduct with respect to poisonous substance.

284. Negligent conduct with respect to poisonous substance.–

Whoever does, with any poisonous substance, any act in a manner so rash or negligent as to endanger human life, or to be likely to cause hurt or injury to any person, or knowingly or negligently omits to take such order with any poisonous substance in his possession as is sufficient to guard against probable danger to human life from such poisonous substance, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.

Classification of Offence:- The offence under this section is cognizable, bailable, triable by any Magistrate, and non-compoundable.

——–             ——–             ——–             ——–             ——–             ——–

THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS ACT, 1960

Section 11. Treating animals cruelly : (1) If any person

(a) beats, kicks, over-rides, over-drives, over-loads, tortures or otherwise treats any animal so as to subject it to unnecessary pain or suffering or causes, or being the owner permits, any animal to be so treated; or

(b) 13(employs in any work or labour or for any purpose any animal which, by reason of its age or any disease) infirmity; wound, sore or other cause, is unfit to be so employed or, being the owner, permits any such unfit animal to be employed; or

(c) wilfully and unreasonably administers any injurious drug or injurious substance to 14(any animal) or wilfully and unreasonably causes or attempts tocause any such drug or substance to be taken by 15(any animal;) or

(d) conveys or carries, whether in or upon any vehicle or not, any animal in such a manner or position as to subject it to unnecessary pain or suffering; or

(e) keeps or confines any animal in any -cage or other receptacle which does not measure sufficiently in height, length and breadth to permit the animal a reasonable opportunity for movement; or

(f) keeps for an unreasonable time any animal chained or tethered upon an unreasonably short or unreasonably heavy chain or cord; or

(g) being the owner, neglects to exercise or cause to be exercised reasonably any dog habitually chained up or kept in close confinement; or

(h) being the owner of (any animal) fails to provide such animal with sufficient food, drink or shelter; or

(i) without reasonable cause, abandons any animal in circumstances which tender it likely that it will suffer pain by reason of starvation thirst; or

(j) wilfully permits any animal, of which he is the owner, to go at large in any street, while the animal is affected with contagious or infectious disease or, without reasonable excuse permits any diseased or disabled animal, of which he is the owner, to die in any street; or

(k) offers for sale or without reasonable cause, has in his possession any animal which is suffering pain by reason of mutilation, starvation, thirst, overcrowding or other illtreatment; or

(1) mutilates any animal or kills any animal (including stray dogs) by using the method of strychnine injections, in the heart or in any other unnecessarily cruel manner or;

(m) solely with a view to providing entertainment

(i) confines or causes to be confined any animal (including tying of an animal as a bait in a tiger or other sanctuary) so as to make it an object or prey for any other animal; or

(n) organises, keeps uses or acts in the management or, any place for animal fighting or for the purpose of baiting any animal or permits or offers any place to be so used or receives money for the admission of any other person to any place kept or used for any such purposes; or

(o) promotes or takes part in any shooting match or competition wherein animals are released from captivity for the purpose of such shooting:

he shall be punishable 19(in the case of a first offence, with fine which shall not be less than ten rupees but which may extend to fifty rupees and in the case of a second or subsequent offence committed within three years of the previous offence, with fine which shall not be less than twenty-five rupees but which may extend, to one hundred rupees or with imprisonment for a term which may extend, to three months, or with both.

(2) For the purposes of section (1) an owner shall be deemed to have committed an offence if he has failed to exercise reasonable care and supervision with a view to the prevention of such offence;

Provided that where an owner is convicted permitting cruelty by reason only of having failed to exercise such care and supervision, he shall not be liable to imprisonment without the option of a fine.

(3) Nothing in this section shall apply to –

(a) the dehorning of cattle, or the castration or branding or nose roping of any animal in the prescribed manner, or

(b) the destruction of stray dogs in lethal chambers by such other methods as may be prescribed, or (Note from ‘Jaagruti’: nothing is prescribed on this front under any laws or directives, humane sterilization of dogs is the only method advocated to control dog population and euthanasia can be administered to terminally ill and incurable animals only)

(c) the extermination or destruction of any animal under the authority of any law for the time being in force; or

(d) any matter dealt with in Chapter IV; or

(e) the commission or omission of any act in the course of the destruction or the preparation for destruction of any animal as food for mankind unless such destruction or preparation was accompanied by the infliction of unnecessary pain or suffering.

12. Penalty for practising phooka or doom dev : If any persons upon any cow or other milch animal the operation called practising phooka or doom dev or any other operation (including injection of any or doom dev. substance) to improve lactation which is injurious to the health of the animal or permits such operation being performed upon any such animal in his possession or under his control, he shall be punishable with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with both, and the animal on which the operation was performed shall be forfeited to the Government.

——–

28. Saving as respects manner of killing prescribed by religion : Nothing contained in this Act shall render it an offence to kill any animal in a manner required by the religion of any community.

——–

38. Power to make rules. –

——–

(3) If any person contravenes, or abets the contravention of, any rules made under this section, he shall be punishable with fine which may extend to one hundred rupees, or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months, or with both.

 

——–             ——–             ——–             ——–             ——–             ——–

TRANSPORT OF ANIMALS, RULES, 1978

In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (h) of sub-section (2) of Section 38 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 (59 of 1960); the Central Government hereby makes the following rules, the same having been previously published as required by the said Section, namely :

——–

 

2. Definitions : In these rules, unless the context otherwise requires–

(a)       qualified veterinary surgeon means one who holds a diploma or a degree of a recognized veterinary college.

——–

96. Issue of certificate before transportation –

(1) A valid certificate issued by an officer or any person or Animal Welfare Organisation duly recognised and authorised for this purpose by the Animal Welfare Board of India or the Central Government shall be procured by any person making transport of any animal before transportation of such animal verifying that all the relevant Central and State Acts, rules and orders pertaining to the said animals including the rules relating to transport of such animals have been duly complied with and that the animal is not being transported for any purpose contrary to the provision of any law.

(2) In the absence of such certificate, the carrier shall refuse to accept the consignment for transport.

97. Cancellation of permit or authorisation for transport –

(1) In the event of contravention or non compliance of any of the rules contained in these rule for transport of animals, if it is pointed out in writing by any officer or persons or Animal Welfare Organisations authorised for this purpose by the Animal Welfare Board of India or the Central Government, then, any permit or authorisation issued for such transport shall be immediately cancelled by the concerned authority and it shall be the duty of the police to stop the further transport even from the intermediary station and proceed against the said offenders and deal with the animals in accordance with law.

(2) The custody of the animals immediately after unloading from the rail wagons, truck or any other vehicle shall be given to the authorised Animal Welfare Organisation if available, till the competent authority or the magistrate having jurisdiction decides about their care and upkeep.

98. General conditions of transport –

(1) Animals to be transported shall be healthy and in good condition and such animals shall be examined by a veterinary doctor for freedom from infectious diseases and their fitness to undertake the journey; provided that the nature and duration of the proposed journey shall be taken into account while deciding upon the degree of fitness.

(2) An animal which is unfit for transport shall not be transported and the animals who are new born, diseased, blind emaciated, lame, fatigued or having given birth during the preceding seventy two hours or likely to give birth during transport shall not be transported.

(3) Pregnant and very young animals shall not be mixed with other animals during transport.

(4) Different classes of animals shall be kept separately during transport.

(5) Diseased animals, whenever transported for treatment, shall not be mixed with other animals

(6) Troublesome animals shall be given tranquilisers before loading during transport.

(7) Animals shall be transported in their on-farm social groups (established atleast one week prior to journey).

——–             ——–             ——–             ——–             ——–             ——–

More articles on this subject and Animal laws of India can be accessed under the following category of posts on Jaagruti


by

The ABC of stray dogs

Animal Birth Control: Its as easy as ABC (Image Courtesy PETA)

Animal Birth Control/ABC Programm involves sterilizing street dogs, vaccinating them against rabies and releasing them back into the areas where they were picked up from.

The article below is kind courtesy of  The Pioneer Newspaper, penned by noted senior journalist Mr. Hiranmay Karlekar who is also the author of a book titled ‘Savage Humans and Stray Dogs’, the article sheds light on the ‘ABC’ of Delhi’s Animal Birth Control/ABC Programme, comes in the wake of the Commonwealth Games recently organised in Delhi in which many street canines (sterilized as well as non-sterilized) were temporarily (for the period of these games) relocated to Animal shelters across Delhi and Noida from many games venues, stadia, hotels, all of whom have now been released back into the areas where they were picked up from (and those canines that were not sterilized were also sterilized in the process and vaccinated against Rabies at the shelters/hospitals they were housed at prior to being released back to their homes). There is a whole scientific basis and reasoning behind doing so and that is what Mr. Karlekar enlightens us all on below. If you still have doubts, drop in a comment underneath or mail us at contact@jaagruti.org

—

The Pioneer EDITS | Saturday, October 23, 2010, By Hiranmay Karlekar

It’s a fallacy to believe that killing street dogs will bring down their numbers. But sterilising them helps in reducing and stabilising their population

According to a report, the Mayor of Delhi has said in an interview to a news channel that the national capital’s stray dogs, which had been removed from their habitats for the duration of the Commonwealth Games, should be killed or kept where they had been taken. He, however, has also reportedly said on television that it was inhuman to kill dogs. I have neither heard either statement nor talked to him. I will, therefore, not go into what he did or did not say. Nor will I criticise him on that account. Instead, I would focus on the issues in question.

Animal Birth Control (Dog) Rules, notified in December 2001 under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (1960), prohibits the killing of stray dogs except in special cases, as when they are rabid or terminally ill. In these too, prescribed procedures have to be followed. Besides, the Rules provide that stray dogs can only be removed from their habitats for neutering and immunisation against rabies. Both done, they have to be returned to places from which they had been taken.

The Rules prescribe the only scientific — and also humane — way of controlling stray dog populations. Killing or removal has not helped anywhere. Dr K Vogel, Chief Veterinary, Public Health, Division of Communicable Diseases, World Health Organisation, and Mr John Hoyt, then President, World Society for the Protection of Animals, made this clear in their joint preface to the Guidelines for Dog Population Management, released by the WHO and WSPA in May 1990. They stated, “All too often, authorities confronted by problems caused by these (stray) dogs have turned to mass destruction in the hope of finding a quick solution, only to find that the destruction had to continue year after year, with no end in sight.”

In its Eighth Report (WHO Technical Report Series 824), WHO’s Expert Committee on Rabies, which met in Geneva from September 24 to 30, stated, “There is no evidence that the removal of dogs has ever had a significant impact on dog population densities and the spread of rabies. The population turnover of dogs may be so high that even the highest recorded removal rates (about 15 per cent of the dog population) are easily compensated by survival rates.” This has been conclusively established in Delhi. In his “Dogs and Dog Control in Developing Countries”, published in The State of Animals 2005, Dr JF Reese writes, “In Delhi, a concerted effort (pre-Animal Birth Control, or ABC) at dog removal killed a third of the straying dogs with no reduction in dog population.”

It has been the same experience everywhere. In his paper, “ABC responsible for decline in human rabies cases”, Dr Chinny Krishna, co-founder and chairman of the Blue Cross Society of India, cites the instance of Madras Corporation’s catch-and-kill programme that began in 1860. He quotes Mr Theodore Bhaskaran, a retired Post Master-General, as stating in an article, “In the 1970s the number of stray dogs destroyed by the corporation was so high that the Central Leather Institute, Madras, designed products —such as neckties and wallets — from dog skins.” Dr Krishna has pointed out elsewhere that the number of dogs killed by the corporation had gone up to 30,000 per year by 1995. Yet the city’s stray dog population and the incidence of rabies continued to increase.

Why does killing or removal not help? According to the Guidelines for Dog Population Management, each habitat has “a specific carrying capacity for each species”, which “essentially depends on the availability, quality and distribution of the resources (shelter, food, water) for the species concerned. The density of population for higher vertebrates (including dogs) is almost always near the carrying capacity of the environment. Any reduction in the population density through additional mortality is rapidly compensated by better reproduction and survival.”

The argument that such a situation will not arise if all stray dogs in a city or country are killed at one go, holds little water. Nowhere has such a venture succeeded. Besides, dogs are territorial. Dogs from one area do not allow those from other areas to enter their areas. Dogs from other areas will occupy any area in which all stray dogs have been massacred. This territorial character of dogs lies at the heart of the ABC programme. With sterilised and vaccinated dogs keeping un-sterilised and un-vaccinated dogs away from their areas, those implementing the programme can concentrate on progressing area by area until a whole city is covered. Otherwise, they will have to keep returning to areas where they had already been with the stray dog population continuing to grow elsewhere.

Significantly, WHO’s Expert Consultation on Rabies, held in Geneva from October 5 to 8, 2004, had stated (WHO: Technical Report Series 824), “Since the 1960s, ABC programmes coupled with rabies vaccination have been advocated as a method to control urban street male and female dog populations and ultimately human rabies in Asia The rationale is to reduce the dog population turnover as well as the number of dogs susceptible to rabies in Asia and limit aspects of male dog behaviour (such as dispersal and fighting) that facilitate the spread of rabies.”

Delhi has had a reasonably successful ABC programme since 2003. Between 40 and 50 per cent of the dogs removed from the Commonwealth Games sites to the care of NGOs were found neutered. At this rate the target of 70 per cent, required to stabilise and then gradually bring down stray dog populations, should be reached in the next few years. Meanwhile, one needs to congratulate the Government and Municipal Corporation of Delhi, the New Delhi Municipal Council and NGOs like Friendicoes, Cure & Care, Sonadi, PAWS and Sanjay Gandhi Animal Care Centre and SPCA NOIDA for the manner in which they temporarily relocated and looked after around 700 dogs. The glitches that occurred were perhaps inevitable in an exercise of the magnitude undertaken. While Mr Rakesh Mehta, Chief Secretary of Delhi, and Mr KS Mehra, Commissioner of MCD, cut through all bureaucratic red tape to promptly take the big decisions, Dr RBS Tyagi and Dr Alok Agarwal of MCD and Dr Dinesh Yadav of NDMC worked tirelessly, almost round-the-clock. Animal lovers throughout India need to warmly applaud all of them.

by

Commonwealth Games and Street Dogs- Part 2

For a background or part 1 of this story on Commonwealth Games (Delhi, 2010) and street dogs, kindly click here and then read on below

On 5th October, 2010, the Animal Welfare Board of India wrote to the Municipal Corporation of Delhi to apprise them of the fact that the  Continued (temporary) removal of stray dogs by the municipal agencies from Commonwealth Games venues is turning out to be ‘COUNTER PRODUCTIVE’.

To understand how random displacement of street dogs can turn counter-productive, please read the letter from AWBI mentioned above by clicking on the image below:

Following this letter, a website ‘www.cwgdogs.in‘ has been launched to help find your missing/caught street Dogs during the Commonwealth Games ‘dog catching’ spree.

If you are one of those missing your friendly neighbourhood canine on the street – please identify them from the photographs posted on this website, contact these shelters and get them back to their homes for that is where they belong.

by

Commonwealth Games and Street Dogs

 

(Courtesy: Associated Press, http://oneclick.indiatimes.com)

 

After the news of the report submitted by Commonwealth Games Federation President and CEO was made public by the electronic media early this week,  it was apparently qouted and shown in the photographs submitted by the committee that, “there were pug marks of street dogs on the mattresses in the apartments of the games villages that are due to host the athletes as well as their faeces littered in the Games village”.

Since people in foriegn countries are not used to co-existing with dogs the way we Indians are, the CWG commitee had expressed their concern regarding the presence of street dogs in the Games village and asked for their removal.

But as per the Indian Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960, Delhi High Court orders and orders of the Supreme Court, the street dogs from any area can be removed only for sterilization and vaccination purposes and then they have to be released back into the same area from where they were picked up.

Thus, due to the timely intervention of Major General (Retd) Dr. R.M Kharb, Chairperson, Animal Welfare Board of India and Mr. Hiranmay Karlekar, Member, Animal Welfare Board of India and the pro-active humane outlook adopted by the Commissioner of Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) Mr. K.S Mehra, IAS and the Chief Secretary, Government of Delhi Government, Mr. Rakesh Mehta, IAS- the street dogs living in and around the venues earmarked for the Commonwealth Games, 2010- have got a reprieve and in the process India has set an example in front of the other countries of the world with regard to humane treatment of street animals and has also in the process respected its own laws and India’s constitution.

Now the task of picking them up and looking after them till the period of the Games has been entrusted into the hands of SPCA Noida, Cure n Care, Sonadi Animal Care Hospital Friendicoes SECA, an NGO based out of South Delhi, who will be housing them at their South Delhi, Ghazipur and Gurgaon centres where each dog will be given a token with details of the area from where it was picked up.

Volunteers and food are invited by all these NGOs to help in tagging and feeding of the dogs coming in every day and also for helping release them back into their respective territories after the games get over. However, please remember to contact these respective shelters prior to going in there (The contact numbers of all these shelters can be accessed here).

In the interim period, if these dogs will are sterilized and vaccinated by the NGO, then that would be an added bonus for these dogs and the city.

Click on the thumbnails below to read the communication issued by Animal Welfare Board of India’s Chairperson to the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD):

Below is the news in today’s Times of India with regard to this initiative and here is the link to today’s online news on this subject.

by

How to act when your society RWA puts a bar on letting your pet dog use the building lift?

Pet Dogs: Should they be allowed on lifts or not? (Photo credit: theotokos.co.za)

On the afternoon of 10th August 2010, the Jaagruti helpline received a call from Mrs. Usha Gulati in Faridabad who informed that the residents welfare association of the colony in which they stay had objected to them taking their Pet dog Pixie up and down the building lift from their 5th floor flat. Ms. Gulati and her family was willing to take Pixie down (for his walks) using the stairs but given his age (Pixie is 10+ years old) and the fact that they live on the 5th Floor, the Gulati family was not willing to cow down to the demands and orders of the RWA in any way and were even willing to take this matter to court should the RWA remain adamant in its stance on this subject.

Most of the times the arguments that RWA office bearers give to pet owners while objecting them to using the building lift with their pets- ‘the pets odour is harmful for human health’, ‘pets are dirty’, ‘pets make the lift dirty’, ‘pets can pounce or growl or attack other people in the lift’ and the list goes on as per the whims and fancies of the RWA representatives.

Ms. Gulati mentioned to us that she has a copy of a news clipping that came out in Times of India newspaper in December 2008 in which a Mumbai resident had approached a consumer court for his pet dog Shimu.  Further to this Ms Gulati wanted to know from us if there was any previous judgment in this regard that they could use to help Pixie. Below is presented a step-by-step guide on how to tackle such a problem which, as we learnt is a common problem faced by many people living with their pets in buildings with lifts face across many cities in India. The key to coming out victors in such a situation is to have cent percent commitment towards your pet and to be willing to stand up for your pet’s rights, for pets are family!

Through the power of the internet, we enquired upon this ‘Pets being denied lift access’ subject from people across the animal welfare fraternity across India, the following facts came to light and we are sharing this information in our effort to inspire all those who face similar problems to act accordingly when faced with such situations. As for what transpired in the story of Pixie, read this till the end:

The only preceeding judgement in such a case was when Mr. Ajay Marathe, a resident of Mumbai’s Vashi Colony approached the Consumer Court (on 26th September, 2008) when his colony’s association passed a resolution disallowing them to use the building lift with their pet dog ‘Shimu’, who was then 11 years old who was suffering from osteo-arthritis (pain in the bones and joints)

The following trail of news stories on Shimu’s case illustrate the trail of events on this subject as well.

No entry for pets in lifts, Vashi housing society tells residents

Indian Express
N Ganesh Fri Sep 12 2008
Mumbai, September 11 : Says odour may be harmful to health; SPCA takes up issue
Life for 11-year-old Peter-Pan alias Shimu, a Labrador Retriever, has become tougher than ever. Shimu stays with his owners, Ajay and Nandini Marathe, on the fifth floor of New Sarvodaya Co-operative Housing Society, at Sector 4 in Vashi. Shimu has been diagnosed with osteoarthritis, an ailment in which the patient suffers from severe joint pain. However, Shimu will now have to use the staircase instead of the lift, as a resolution passed by the general body of the society bars pets from using the building elevator.

On August 3, 2008, the general body resolved to prevent use of lifts by residents accompanied by their pets. According to a notice issued to Marathe and the general body resolution, the society fears that the odour of the pets which is left behind in the lifts, can be hazardous to the life and health of the building residents. In the month of May 2008, the society sought numerous documents certifying the fitness levels of the dog. Marathe, who has a licence for the dog, produced a certificate issued by the Bombay Veterinary College that dog is licenced, vaccinated, healthy and does not suffer from any infectious or contagious disease. The Bombay Veterinary College certificate also adds that since the dog is aged and suffering from osteoarthritis, it should be allowed to use the lift, as climbing the stairs would be a painful task.

Marathe tried to find a way out by using air fresheners after the use of lift by the pet dog. However, the society officer tersely told Marathe that use of air fresheners was not recommended.

After a complaint of Marathe, the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) has taken up the issue. S B Kadam, assistant secretary, SPCA said, “SPCA inspectors have paid a visit to the society and asked the office bearers to be practical and permit use of lift for the pet dog concerned. We will be hearing from them soon.”

Marathe said, “I paid the watchman from the neighouring building to carry the dog up and down the building thrice a day so that he could answer nature’s call. This arrangement worked fine for a few days, however he stopped coming after being warned by society office bearers.”

Meanwhile, Marathe has temporarily shifted Shimu to his in-laws place at Pen in Raigad district. Chairman of the housing society Arvind Palwankar said, “It is a very old sick dog with a bad odour. We only prevented Marathe from using the lift. Moreover, Marathe is a nuisance as he relentlessly complains against the society to the authorities about all things trivial.”

What the law says
Advocate Rahul Thakur who is associated with In Defense of Animals (IDA) said that the society resolution violates section 11 (3) of Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act 1960. It is also against article 51 A (g) of the Indian Constitution according to which it is the duty of every citizen to have compassion for animals, living creatures and improve the natural environment. Thakur said, “The society resolution is illegal as it is unconstitutional.”

Please note the underlined portion in the last paragraph of the above story.

Luckily for Shimu, who is now in good heavens, the Consumer Court upheld the society’s resolution and passed the judgement in his favour and also asked the Association to pay Mr. Ajay Marathe Rs.5000/- in lieu of the damages and the expenses incurred by him on this court case.

Please read through the following news stories:

Peter Pan can use apartment lift now

Indian Express

N Ganesh Dec 17, 2008

Mumbai This 11-year-old dog was barred from using lift by the housing society in Navi Mumbai

The consumer forum came to the rescue of a 11-year-old dog, Peter Pan alias Shimu, who was not allowed to use the apartment lift by the office bearers of a housing society in Navi Mumbai. Shimu, a pet belonging to Ajay and Nandini Marathe, residing on the fifth floor of New Sarvodaya co-operative housing society was barred from using the society lift. Shimu had been diagnosed with osteoarthritis — an ailment that causes acute pain in the joints.

In its order dated December 11, 2008 the Thane District Additional Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum ruled that the housing society’s move to prevent pets from using the apartment lift without any valid reasons amounted to deficiency in service to the members as per section 2 (1) (g) of the Consumers Protection Act.

The Marathes were asked to produce documents certifying the illness of the dog. However, despite producing the required certificates and reports, the general body of the housing society in August 2008 resolved to ban pet animals from using apartment lifts.

The housing society contended before the forum that the dog was not a consumer of the housing society and hence the forum cannot hold the society liable. The consumer court however said in its order: “The issue of ‘dog’ being or not being the consumer of the society is not valid, instead the valid issue should be whether the complainant is consumer of the housing society or not.”

Since the membership of the Marathes to the housing society was not disputed, the consumer court said: “The dog has valid license and has been certified by a veterinary doctor of having no contagious and infectious disease. It has received all its vaccines. The doctor has also recommended the use of lifts owing to its condition.”

The housing society contended that the use of lifts by pets threatened the safety of the residents. However the Consumer court held that the housing society’s decision to ban pets from using lifts was without any valid reasons and hence amounted to deficiency in service. The court has ordered the housing society to pay Rs 3000 as damages and Rs 2000 as legal expenses to the Marathes.

Consumer court upholds dog’s right to use lift

18th December, 2008,  Published in: The Times of India

Mumbai: An 11-year-old Labrador has emerged a champion of dog rights by not only winning for himself the right to travel in the elevator of his apartment complex in a Mumbai suburb but getting his master a Rs 5,000 compensation from the apartment’s anti-pet managing committee.

The Thane District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum passed an order, defending Shimu aka Peter Pan’s right to use the left and directed the society to compensate the owner for the harassment he faced. The dog’s owner, Ajay Marathe (52), a fifth floor resident of New Sarvoday Cooperative Society at Vashi, told TOI on Wednesday: This is a very good judgement given in our favour in real time. In fact, a lot of pet owners face the same problem in Mumbai; this order can be an important reference point to help them use their society lifts.

Marathe added that the 35-kg Shimu suffered from pain in the joints and couldn’t use the stairway. The society this May passed a resolution, saying pets like cats and dogs could not be allowed in the lift as their body odour could be injurious to health and life, which I found to be ridiculous, he said.

Marathe first went to the cops, but failing to get a sympathetic response from them, he lodged a case in the Thane consumer court. The consumer court has given this judgement in less than three months. The Rs 5,000 compensation for my pet is also welcome as I had to temporarily shift Shimu to my in laws house in Pen, which caused some discomfort to him, he said.

To read the full judgement given by the Consumer Court on this case in favour of Shimu the dog, please click here

Since Shimu passed away soon after this judgement was announced, Mr. Marathe donated the Rs.5000/- compensation he received to the animal welfare charity named PAWS which used this contribution to publish brochures on the ‘Tree Protection Act’, which carried Shimu’s name on it as a mark of honour to his spirit.

Now, coming back to Pixie’s case in Fraidabad, here is what happened-

Deriving inspiration from Mr. Marathe’s stance on getting justice for Shimu, Ms. Usha Gulati’s familytook the press clipping of Shimu’s news (which had come out in TOI in December 2008) and approached the Local  Police with the copy of the same and lodged a complaint against the RWA…the cops then called and came over to meet the RWA representatives and following all of this, an amicable solution was reached upon in which it was agreed that the  Gulati family would be allowed to bring their pet dog Pixie down the stairs for his walk and after he has relieved himself and there is apparently nothing in his stomach to ‘dirty’ the lift with, he can take the lift upstairs to his fifth floor house along with his owner.

So, next time you face such an issue, consider using all of this information above and stand up to seek justice for your animal friends. Trust us, its all worth the effort and a way to (try to) pay back  for all the love that your pet animal has showered upon you unconditionally.

However, we would like to also suggest to you that as always prevention is better than cure so please be mindful of a few other things a ‘responsible’ pet owner can follow while using the lift with their pet, to avoid inconvenience to the fellow lift users:

1. Make sure that your pet dog/cat is vaccinated to avoid any health related arguments from fellow building residents.

2. Keep your pet animal on a leash.

3. If your pet is aggressive and has a tendency to bite strangers, then it would be better to put a muzzle around the pet’s mouth while you move your pet in the lift. You can remove the muzzle once your pet is out of the lift.

4. Try using the lift when no one is in there, alternatively avoid using the lift when someone (you know) having a canine/feline-phobia (i.e someone who is well-known to be scared of dogs/cats) is already travelling in the lift.

5. Make sure that your pet doesn’t pee or defecate in there, so avoid taking young untrained pups in the lift as else you would most likely end up creating a lot more disgruntled neighbours or should we say enemies!

6. Take care of the health and hygiene of your pet dog/animal, give it a nice bath regularly so that it doesn’t emanate any sort of stinking odour in a public place like a lift, which may else be a cause of inconvenience for the fellow residents of your building.

* Credits: We deeply thank AWBI’s lawyer Anjali Sharma, PAWS founder trustee Nilesh Bhanage and Vishruti Aggarwal for sharing their experiences, the video link and the consumer court judgement with us.

by

‘Bali’ (Animal Sacrifice) in 21st Century India: The Law (Video)

Ready to be sacrificed!

This photo of a ‘young baby goat’ (referred to as a ‘kid’ in proper English language) tied to the side of a temple railing-waiting to be sacrificed was shared with us by Mr. Satish C. Gupta, an Agra resident.  It was clicked on his recent visit to Kamakhya Temple in  Guwahati, Assam.

He also shared with us another photograph clicked at this temple which shows the remnants of a recently sacrificed bird lying on the floor of this temple.

Kamakhya temple, Guwahati (Assam, India)

On the floor: Remnants of a bird sacrificed at this temple

It is strange that in a progressively developing country like India, the practice of sacrificing animals for religious reasons, in the hope that doing so will please the deities and grant a person’s wish! And we learn that Animal Sacrifice is legal in Bengal and Assam, that is why perhaps we see the shots like the ones above from Kamakhya Temple (located in Guwahati, Assam).

To learn more about the practice of Animal Sacrifices in India, their legal angle and what you can do to help stop it, please have a look at the video below.

But there are laws banning animal sacrifices in many states across India and also national laws, and the reason these laws are not being enforced is because the authorities are as ignorant of the laws as much as we are, so this puts all the more responsibility on us to inform people of the laws and inspire them to use them tactfully for the benefit of animals and also share these with the authorities and educate people alike to put an end to the archaic and cruel practice of ‘Animal Sacrifices’.

https://jaagrutiindia.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/copy-of-animal-sacrifices.avi: Save this link please to watch this video.

Below is the list of Indian states where Animal Sacrifice is ILLEGAL:

Tamil Nadu: Tamil Nadu Animals and Birds Sacrifices Prevention Act, 1950

Karnataka: Karnataka Animal Sacrifice Prohibition Act 1959

Gujarat:Gujarat Animals and Birds Sacrifice Prohibition Act, 1972

Andhra Pradesh: Andhra Pradesh Animals and Birds Sacrifices (Prohibition) Act, 1950

Kerala: The Kerala Animals and Birds Sacrifices Prohibition Act, 1968

Rajasthan: The Rajasthan Animals and Birds Sacrifice (Prohibition) Act,1975.

Pondicherry: The Pondicherry Animals and Birds Sacrifices Prohibition Act, 1965

….

If you would like to meet a few goats who got sacrificed during last Id celebrations in Delhi on 28th November 2009..scroll below

by

India: Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960 (Also referred to as the PCA Act, 1960)

Click on the link below to download this PDF file to make yourself familiar with Animal Protection laws in India. Share this booklet with your neighbourhood Police Station too, its important we spread the word around on these largely unknown laws.

Click on this link that would lead you to a Dossier on animal protection laws for the guidance of police, HAWOs(Honorary Animal Welfare Officers), NGOs AND AWOs(Animal Welfare Organisations), that contains a compilation of Frequently Asked Questions answered thematically

Other useful resources are as follows:

Animals and the Law: A Powerpoint presentation by Advocate Ms. Aparna Rajagopal

The Indian PCA Act 1960: PDF File of The PCA – Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960, a central act.

 

Rules under Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960

 

Also, kindly consider watching the below video on Section 11 of the Indian Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960

by

11 Street Dogs ‘allegedly’cut & pierced to death: Protest on 7th May’10 at Delhi Jal Board Office in Lajpat Nagar, Delhi

Take Action:

Protest tomorrow i.e 7th May, 2010 (Friday) by animal activists and concerned citizens at 3.30 pm at Delhi Jal Board Office – located at Jal Sadan, Opposite MCD Building, Shiv Mandir Marg , Near Jal Vihar Terminal at Lajpat Nagar-II, Delhi.

This is to demand strong action against those employees/people who are suspected to have rounded up 11 street dogs within the Delhi Jal Board compound and mercilessly cut and pierced them all to death.

Be there!

This gory incident is believed to have transpired in broad daylight on Sunday the 2nd May, 2010, between 2 to 3pm.

For more details of the incident, please click on the thumbnails below to enlarge the copies of the self-explanatory letter sent by Maj Gen (Retd) Dr. Kharb, Chairman AWBI on 5th May, 2010  to the CEO of Delhi Jal Board.

To prompt the officials into taking stern action against the perpetrators of this crime, you can write letters of strong protest to Mr. Ramesh Negi, the C.E.O. of the Delhi Jal  His e-mail address is ceodjb@hotmail.com – and shame him into taking action.

His mailing address is :

Shri Ramesh Negi,  Chief Executive Officer

Delhi Jal Board,

Varunalaya, Phase II, Karol Bagh,

New Delhi-110005

Please mark copies to:

Mr. B.P. Saraswat

Executive Engineer, South IInd

Delhi Jal Board, Jal Sadan Building ,

Near Shiv Mandir, Lajpat Nagar

New Delhi

&

The S.H.O.

Police Station Lajpat Nagar

New Delhi.


For the benefit of those who are unable to download/click open the above image files of AWBI’s letter, the soft copy of the mail sent by Maj Gen (Retd) DR. Kharb, Chairperson, Animal Welfare Board of India to to Mr. Ramesh Neg, CEO, Delhi Jal Board is pasted below:

5th May 2010

To,

Shri Ramesh Negi

Chief Executive Officer

Delhi Jal Board

Varunalaya

Phase II, Karol Bagh,

New Delhi-110005

(ceodjb@hotmail.com )


SUB:  SHOCKING BUTCHERY AT THE JAL BOARD BUILDING AT LAJPAT NAGAR

Dear Sir,

In my capacity as Chairperson of the Animal Welfare Board of India, a statutory body set up under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, I am writing to you to invite your attention to a shocking instance of butchery, and utterly brutal killings of stray dogs at the Jal Board office, Jal Sadan, Lajpat Nagar, on Sunday, the 2ndof May, a little after 2.00 p.m., that has come to light a little while ago.  As information filters out, several agitated residents of Delhi are calling me up and demanding that the perpetrators of the criminal acts be brought to book.

Apparently, on Sunday, the 2nd of May, 2010, between 2 and 3 p.m., when 4 (four) guards, including one Ram Kher, were ostensibly guarding the complex, and 12 (twelve) Delhi Jal Board staff, including one Rakesh, and one Ashok, were on emergency water supply duty, and therefore present at the complex, and some canteen staff were also present, 5 to 6 miscreants easily breached the security and entered the complex ! We have learnt that they were probably from the adjoining Vinoba Puri area. Despite the sensitive nature of the installation – a Delhi Jal Board installation – they were allowed to enter.   Thereafter, in connivance with the 4 guards on duty, and either some or all of the staff on emergency duty, the miscreants, and the guards, and some of the others brutally beat up and cut / chopped 11 community dogs (i.e. stray dogs resident at the complex), to a horribly painful death. Apparently, legs were broken, cuts were inflicted, and bodies pierced with bhalas and other sharp objects, before the poor, hapless animals died. Some dogs, in a desperate bid to escape, ran into the building. However, the guards, and some or all of the 12 staff of duty kicked and beat them out. They were then killed in the gruesome and horribly sub-human manner described above.

The Board has also learnt that thereafter, the flesh and some parts of the body of the poor animals that suffered and died were eaten/kept aside for eating later. Some animal remains were thrown into an adjoining area, and other remains and blood were strewn  over  the  place  at  that  time. What  is  shocking  is that  none  of the persons present called up the police, or even the Number 100, clearly demonstrating that they were all participating in the act. It was only yesterday, and today, that the other employees learnt what had occurred, and informed some Animal Welfare Organizations and the Animal Welfare Board of India.

The Board would have you know that animal cruelty is an offence – under Section 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, and Sections 428 and 429 of the Indian Penal Code – punishable with imprisonment and fine. The Animal Welfare Board of India shall of course be lodging a criminal complaint and taking legal recourse ; but I urge you as well to investigate, and take strong action against the employees who connived with the miscreants and perpetrated the heinous crime described above.

Please bear in mind that apart from the shameful slaughter of community dogs that the guards, and some/all of the employees present at the complex on Sunday, the 2nd of May, 2010, resorted to, a sensitive Jal Board installation was breached with impunity! The miscreants could have as easily mixed hazardous substances with water, leading to human casualties / illness.

What has occurred is serious enough to merit your intervention and strong action. Kindly do the needful, and please keep me informed.

Yours Sincerely

(Dr. R.M. Kharb)

Maj.Gen.(Retd.), AVSM

Chairman, AWBI

Copies to:-

Mr. B.P. Saraswat

Executive Engineer, South IInd

Delhi Jal Board, Jal Sadan Building ,

Near Shiv Mandir, Lajpat Nagar

New Delhi

&

The S.H.O.

Police Station Lajpat Nagar

New Delhi.

by

What to do when you see an animal being treated cruelly?

Backgrounder on animal laws in India:

“The greatness of a nation is judged by the way it treats its animals”, said Mahatma Gandhi once as he was leading India through the country’s fight for independence from the colonial rulers. But long before animal activism became a global movement and animal laws were enacted in India in their present form, there are pointers that India as a nation has revered nature, its flora and fauna.  The earliest laws of conservation date back to as early as 3rd Century B.C when Emperor Ashoka had banned killing and hunting of all animals in his kingdom. Images depicted in ancient Indian art and wall carvings, the notes and stories mentioned in Indian scriptures and fables like Panchatantra and Hitopdesha, all of these reflect the ethos of conservation and reverence for animals. But as India moves ahead in the rat-race for being a developed country, morals and ethos are being left behind and superseded by an insensitivity and egotistical attitude that is hard to comprehend.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Stand up against Cruelty to Animals

“Unseen they suffer, unheard they cry

In Agony they linger, in loneliness they die

Does it mean anything to you or anyone who passes by?”

These words penned above epitomize the pain, the suffering that millions of animals endure at the hand of humans every single day.

Though killing or torturing humans is considered to be a crime instantaneously, many amongst us perhaps pay mute witnesses to incidences of animal cruelty happening all around us. The fact is that laws do exist in this country of ours for protection of cruelty towards animals. The main laws are The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972. However few people and even fewer policemen and lawyers are aware of these laws and in the wake of human ignorance on these laws, animals are helpless and fall victims to needs and deeds of humans.

Overloading donkeys with bricks, exhausting the elephant and camels with over riding in a  a mela or at a tourist spot, whipping the horse and the bullock pulling the tonga or the cart, stuffing the cages with chickens in your local meat shop, transporting cattle and livestock one on top of the other in trucks while being taken to slaughterhouses or even treating your pet with neglect- not providing him food or water or chaining him in the sun, killing, maiming beating an animal…each of these acts is an act of animal cruelty under either Section 11 or Section 12 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960 (PCA Act 1960).

PCA Act is a Central Act and is in force throughout the country/Indian territory. There are many rules drafted within this act that look into usage of animals in films i.e performing animal rules, transport of animals rules, rules for prevention of cruelty to draught and farm animals and many more. Though in terms of penal provisions these laws are still weak and in urgent need to be reformed, but that will only happen when public wants or asks for it as the animals themselves will never be able to do so, contrary to the activists who fight battles for laws to protect tribal rights or gay rights for that matter!

Many of you would have seen an overloaded mules or an overloaded bullock/horse cart on the roads every day. Most people prefer to ignore that sight but even when the very few who are aware of animal cruelty laws objects to the ‘owner’ of the animal being ill-treated to not to inflict their animal with cruelty, generally the owner objects loudly in retaliation! The reason behind this marked indifference on part of the ‘owner’ towards the pain and suffering of their very own animal is “because humans treat animals as ‘commodities’ and ‘machines’, something that they have purchased and they now ‘own’…something that they are within their rights to both, use as well as abuse!”, says Anjali Sharma, a senior advocate representing Animal Welfare Board of India.

Below is a list of what every citizen should do when they see someone inflicting cruelty upon animals:

1. Complain to the local state SPCA (Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals)/Animal Welfare Organisations working in your area, though as an entity an NGO can’t enforce the law, but they can put you in touch with an animal activist who deals in filing complaints and bringing attention to such matters with legal or media-based intervention. Importantly, Animal welfare Organisations and Animal hospitals can be contacted to provide relief to the suffering animal.

2. Contact the Police: On a national level, Police are the major enforcement body for the PCA Act 1960. They are obliged to take action against the offender and render help to the suffering animals as per the procedure outlined in the PCA Act when the offence against the animal is amongst those listed in Section 11 or 12 of the PCA Act. Police are even obliged to extend help to the enforcement staff of SPCA as well as ordinary citizens to lodge a complaint/FIR against an incident of animal cruelty. If the Police doesn’t adhere to your complaint, you can also contact the magistrate directly with a written complaint.

One can also lodge a complaint under Section 428 and 429 of the Indian Penal Code of 1860 under which, ‘mischief of killing or maiming an animal amounts to an offence’ and the       offender can be imprisoned for upto five years or a fine or both.

3. Know the law: for example a donkey should be loaded with only 35 kgs of weight at one time; the permissible loading capacity of a truck is 4 buffaloes or 40 sheep/goats. Anything over and above it is technically illegal under the law.

Learn to make a distinction of cognizable and non-cognizable offences outlined in the PCA act 1960. Section 43 of Criminal Procedure Code empowers every citizen the right to perform a ‘citizen’s arrest’ i.e the right to arrest a person who has committed in their presence a ‘cognizable’ offence, an offence for which the offender can be arrested without a warrant.

Cognizable offences under PCA Act 1962 include the following:

a)     Under Section 12 of the PCA Act, 1962, injecting oxytocin injections to cows/milch animals, to improve lactation/milk-giving capacity – which is injurious to health of the animal or permitting such operation to be performed by any other person on the animal he/she ‘owns’ is a cognizable offence. However, this may be one of the most common things that you see used by local legal/illegal dairy owners throughout the country.

b)     Under Section 11(1)(l), mutilating or killing any animal, including stray dogs by using poisoning methods or any other unnecessarily cruel means

c)     Under Section 11(1)(n) organizing/keeping/using any place for animal fighting/baiting and receiving money on the same.

d)     Under Section 11(1)(o), promoting or taking part in any shooting match or competition wherein animals are released from captivity for the purpose of shooting/killing.

4. Documentation is the ‘Key’: In your complaint, be as factual and precise of your observation of the animal crime. Give precise dates, times, locations and photographic evidence if any (while remembering to keep a photocopy with yourself). You are also advised to keep a record of all the officers you are interacting with so that if they don’t listen you can proceed to the next level in the hierarchy to demand justice for the animal/s you are fighting for. Getting a vet’s certificate for the animal in consideration would also prove to be good documentary and supporting evidence.

When reporting animal cruelty, we should look out for the following: Physical condition of the animal, telltale signs of animal cruelty, cruelty during their training and practice, housing (size of cages), overcrowding, mode of transportation, sanitation and hygiene.

5. Stand up, speak up against injustice. Never give up, keep up the effort!

The Indian Constitution, also, under Article 51 A (g) imposes upon every Indian Citizen a fundamental duty to have compassion for all living creatures. But, from subjecting animals to meaningless experiments in cosmetic-testing laboratories to killing one animal in front of the other in an illegal slaughterhouse, from holding cockfights to boiling monitor lizards alive to extract oil from their bodies, mankind does it all and that too shamelessly. It is for us who are aware and informed to keep our comforts aside momentarily and become the voice for these mute, speechless animals as they wage their lonely hopeless battle against the all powerful ‘man’.

What makes cruelty to animals morally unpardonable and unacceptable, over and above human cruelty? Humans can still protest against cruelty meted out to them, they have a voice to raise alarm, hands to hit back. The animals sadly don’t have those options either, so in effect they are defenseless in the face of the cruelty humans mete out to them, be it for their own pleasure, benefit or to fulfill their sadistic desires!

Fyodor Dostoevsky once said that, “no animal could ever be as cruel as a man, so artfully, so artistically cruel.”  One would agree to it as Advocate Anjali Sharma concludes, “Perhaps humans are the worst animals ever born on this planet”.

“I don’t believe in the concept of hell, but if I did, I think it would be filled with humans who are cruel to animals”- Gary Larson

Text: Vasudha Mehta

by

The Indian Street Dog

Bureaucrats who retire do one of three things: they lobby to be appointed to some government body so that they can retain their houses; and more often than not they stand for Residents Welfare Associations so that they can bully someone or they write article for the newspapers and the less they know , the more they expound their theories…and more often than not for most RWAs across Delhi and NCR, their favourite subject is ‘Dogs in their colonies’…this article comes at a time when a group of people in Delhi have moved to the High Court with a plea to ’save them from their rabid neighbours’. This is perhaps their last resort to seek justice and peace of mind, because for far too long, many of these Delhiites had been ridiculed and abused, threatened and blackmailed by their (‘rabid’) neighbours for a ‘crime’ of theirs; the fault being that these group of people ‘loved and cared for the street dogs, their much friendlier neighbourhood denizen’.

This article is a humble attempt to enlighten you all about our friendly neighbourhood street dog and clear the facts about the utility of the Animal Birth Control (ABC) and Vaccination Programme run by the Delhi Government (MCD and NDMC) through about 7 partner NGOs in Delhi for these canines.

India has been home to the highly intelligent Pariah dog, one of the world’s oldest canine breeds, existing in Asia and Africa since human beings first started living in settlements. They co-exist happily with humans, in fact their primary aim in urban settlements is to protect humans and to act as scavengers. It is not for no reason that each dog is fed by local residents and occupies pride of place in poor settlements.

The rationale of the animal sterilization, vaccination and re-release to its original area is a scientifically worked out programme which took years to evolve by WHO, civic authorities the judiciary, backed by success stories round the world starting from America. The concept of sterilization of dogs itself came from San Mateo in the United States, when civic authorities realized that killing dogs had not lead to any decrease in the dog-population. The County of San Mateo passed the resolution to sterilize and this was a great success. This programme is being followed successfully in various parts of America and Canada and many other developed as well as developing nations.

There is scientific thought behind restoring a sterilized dog to his original habitat. Dogs are territorial animals. They mark out their territories based on the food available and they do not let outsiders come in. When these local dogs are removed from their territory, other dogs move in to occupy them. These may not be sterilized so the problem continues for that locality. Dog fights increase as any new dog entering a territory is attacked by the dogs already in that area and non-sterilized dogs continue to mate and produce litters. Rabies continues to spread as none of the dogs in that area are vaccinated against it. The new dogs are hostile to the residents so problems of safety continue. A sterilized and vaccinated dog doesn’t breed, they guard their territory from intruders and new dogs, they become docile and don’t fight with other dogs during the mating season. You can identify a sterilized and a vaccinated dog by a triangular notch on one of its ears.

The ABC programme has been in place for many years now – and noticeably the rabies incidences have reduced, which is a remarkable achievement by the civic authorities and the NGOs.

Studies by the World Health Organization and the Animal Welfare Board of India show that dog-population control measures which work in developed countries are unsuccessful in developing countries like ours since urban conditions are very different over here. The urban environment in India has two features that encourage stray animal populations-exposed garbage and slums-neither of which exists in developed countries. Stray dogs in developed countries are unable to survive or breed on city streets since they can find nothing to eat. Hence, over there, they are captured, housed in animal shelters, neutered and re-homed.

The ‘catch and kill’ concept of controlling dog-population was started by the British in the 19th Century. It was continued on a large scale after Independence by the municipal authorities all over India with the aims of eradicating rabies and controlling street dog populations. Statistics in a study done by the MCD from 1980 to 1990 showed that even after the slaughtering of 8 lakh dogs during the 10-year period, the estimated dog population in Delhi remained 1.5 lakhs. – MCD could not reduce the population even by one. By 1993, the ‘catch and kill’ method was admitted to be a complete failure since rabies deaths had actually increased and the dog population was also perceptibly growing. Thus, in 1994, the courts ordered the dog-sterilization-cum-vaccination programme (popularly known as the “Animal Birth Control” or ABC programme) to replace the killing. Similar programmes were started in Mumbai, Kolkatta, Chennai, Jaipur, and Hyderabad after the High Courts in these cities passed similar orders. Finally, seeing the immediate success of the programme, in 2001, the Government of India has ordered this all over India with the Animal Birth Control (for Dogs) Rules being notified in 2001 under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960.

Dog-bites are very rarely due to stray dogs. Studies show that over 90% of the dog bites are from pet dogs that are aggressive when it comes to defending their territory or repelling intruders to their homes. Every year the numbers of pet-dogs increase and so do the bites. The 5 % of bites which are due to strays are from dogs that have been hurt by colony residents or bitches whose puppies were being attacked.

Dog is nature’s city scavenger. Its specific purpose is to keep garbage, city rats and other non-rodent pests that do not respond to human control in check. If it is removed then, apart from the piling up of huge quantities of garbage, the rat population will also go out of hand. With many cities in India suffering from Dengue and Chikugunya due to unhygienic civic conditions, it is dogs that are responsible for keeping the city’s rat population under check. Rats are the carriers of the deadly bubonic plague disease. One pair of rats is ready for breeding within six weeks of being born. Each pair turns into 35,000 rats by the end of each year. No municipal corporation has till date allocated a single-paisa for the destruction of rats. In 1980, one of the reasons why Surat in Gujarat was infected with plague was the decimation of the city’s street dogs by the local municipality.

It is practically impossible in a country like ours to dump all street dogs into concentration camps or dog pounds. Where is the space, time and resources to carry out this exercise when there is no space to shift commercial establishments out of residential areas or rehabilitate the slum dwellers?

It makes more sense to let the dog live where it belongs. In fact every responsible and humane RWA should contribute and become a partner in getting their dogs sterilized and vaccinated at any of the animal hospitals set up in Delhi for this purpose.

The question of ownership doesn’t arise in this case at all. We talk of passing bills that would give tribals the right to live on forest lands on which they have been living for ages. In case of animals, the place where they are born is the place to which they belong.

The killing method has failed to control rabies in developing countries -including Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Cambodia, North Korea, Afghanistan, Jordan, Syria, Yemen, Bangladesh, Nepal, Ukraine, Uzbekistan. Most of these countries have now adopted the Indian method of ABC.

Dogs are a man’s best friend…and it won’t harm many of us if we were to feed the dog in our street once a day, and we can be sure that we would have a friend by our doorstep delightful to see us every time we step out or come home after a long tiring day…and in this selfish world, it is unconditional love and respect that we all crave for and our very own street dog is perhaps our best bet!

To read this article in Hindi language, please click here यह गली के कुत्ते.

If you have some time to spare and few thoughts to spare as well, watch the Videos below, may be you will end up changing your mind and be kind the next time you see our very own Indian Dog on the street.

{The above  Video was made for a group by the name of ‘People for Animals’, we are sharing and embedding it here on Jaagruti because it beautifully communicates the story of the Indian Street Dog}